The present research explores the translation and reception in France, the UK and the US of contemporary Arabic literature by women authors, with a view to answering two main questions that have gone largely unexplored within translation studies: how do women authors from Arab countries lose their agency and subjectivity in the process of translation? And how do the translation of their dissident writings contribute to the construction of an Arab alterity? To answer these questions, the research analyzes three Arabic novels authored by women, and chosen for their very different thematic and formal characteristics, namely Ahlem Mosteghanemi’s Fawḍā al-Ḥawāss (1997), Hanan al-Shaykh’s Innahā Lundun Yā ‘Azīzī (2001), and Rajaa Alsanea’s Banāt al-Riyāḍ (2005). Using Norman Fairclough’s three-dimensional model, the analysis aims to explore the way these authors express their agency through their texts, as well as the images they depict of themselves and of women, in general, in their respective societies/communities. The English and French translations of each novel are then compared to the original with a view to identifying patterns of textural and pragma-semiotic shifts in the translations, and gaining insight into how these shifts undermine the author’s voice and agency. Finally, the analysis moves to the various practices involved in the reception of these translations in the US, the UK and France. Publishers’ decisions, editorial reviews and academic discourse are investigated with a view to identifying patterns in publishers’ decision-making and shedding light on the discourses and tropes undergirding the reception and consumption of these translations in their target contexts.
Analysis of the originals reveals that the authors act as agents of change through their texts. They contest, each in her own way, both local and Western dominant discourses, and (re)imagine their societies and nations in the process. In so doing, they carve out their own discursive spaces in the public sphere and open breaches for social change. However, the research shows that in several of the translations, the authors’ agency is undermined and their dissident discourses are backgrounded while an orientalist discourse is foregrounded. This same reifying discourse appears to underpin the reception of the novels in translation, as well. It is a reifying discourse wherein the representation of cultural difference seems to be inextricably imbricated in the representation of sexual difference: the “Arab woman” is (re)written as voiceless and powerless because of an Islamic religion and an Arab culture that are essentially misogynistic and backward.
Nevertheless, analysis reveals that publishers’ decisions, reviewers mediation and scholarly interest (or disinterest) impinge upon the way these novels are received and consumed more significantly than do translators through their interventions. Finally, the research underscores the importance of an ethical translation that transcends binary approaches and highlights the link between the aesthetic and the political. It also proposes an ethics of reading based on awareness of the situatedness of both the translated text and the reading/translating subject.